SHANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has proceeded with this appeal challenging the order of the learned single Judge dated 3.2.2010.The candidature of the second candidate in panel list of the candidates under Annexure-2, page-68 of the paper book was cancelled due to her filing a forged residential certificate as per the report of the District Magistrate. The petitioner-appellant is 4th in panel of the candidates at whose instance the investigation was made. Now by the order impugned in the writ petition the selection of the second empanelled candidate has been cancelled but at the same time the entire selection process was cancelled directing to make the selection afresh.

(2.) The contention of the appellant before us is that the period is going to expire by 31.3.2010. She is fourth in the panel. The 1st empanelled candidate was not in consideration for being under-age, the 2nd one has been removed and 3rd was given service in a different village, therefore her candidature should be considered.

(3.) We are of the view that fresh selection is always a welcoming situation, but in this case the period is going to expire by 31st March, 2010. The other part of question is imparting education to the children. If the fresh selection is followed, it will not only lead to further expenditure but also delay in imparting education to the students of grassroot level. Moreover, the petitioner-appellant is not an unsuccessful candidate but empanelled candidate as per merit list prepared by the Selection Committee.